In press in M. P. Zanna (Ed.). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 37. We are indebted to Carol Dweck, Mario Mikulincer and Tory Higgins for comments on an earlier draft. Abstract This chapter features the concept of ascribed epistemic authority (Kruglanski, 1989) offered as a unique perspective on source effects in social judgment. In contrast to prior approaches that viewed the source of communication as external to the self, we assume that both the self and external sources may be assigned different degrees of epistemic authority in different domains, and that this determines how individuals process information, make decisions and undertake actions. The present framework traces the socio-developmental aspects of epistemic authority assignments, and considers individual differences in the distribution of authority assignments across sources. From this perspective, we claim a central role in human judgment to the information’s source, and the assessment of its epistemic authority is seen to constitute an essential preliminary phase in individuals’ approach to information.

An important shift in the way persuasion effects in general and source effects in particular were approached by persuasion researchers was occasioned by the work of Petty and Cacioppo (1986) on the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), and Chaiken’s (1979) work on the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM). Conceptually, this shift signaled a break from the neo-behavioristic paradigm adopted by Hovland et al. (1953) and a

Embed HTML

Set your desired dimension then copy the code below to your blog/website.

Width:

Height:

Code:

Says Who ? : Epistemic Authority Effects in Social Judgment

This chapter features the concept of ascribed epistemic authority (Kruglanski, 1989)
offered as a unique perspective on source effects in social judgment. In contrast to prior
approaches that viewed the source of communication as external to the self, we assume
that both the self and external sources may be assigned different degrees of epistemic
authority in different domains, and that this determines how individuals process
information, make decisions and undertake actions. The present framework traces the
socio-developmental aspects of epistemic authority assignments, and considers individual
differences in the distribution of authority assignments across sources. From this
perspective, we claim a central role in human judgment to the information’s source, and
the assessment of its epistemic authority is seen to constitute an essential preliminary
phase in individuals’ approach to information.

Download Says Who ? : Epistemic Authority Effects in Social
Judgment

To continue, complete human verification below.

We need to make sure that you are not a malicious bot or virus.Complete the puzzle to download the document. If you got confused by the question, click reload button to change the puzzle.